Chair
Patrick McLoughlin
MD Dept of Information
Technology (DoIT)
Vice Chair
Patrick Callahan
Prince George’s County
Past Chair
Marshall L. Stevenson III
Whitney Bailey Cox &
Magnani, LLC
Magnani,
LLC
Secretary
Julie Spangler
JMT Technology Group
Treasurer
Al Wainger
Michael Baker International
CAUCUS CHAIRS
Education
Mike Scott
Salisbury University
MSGIC Executive Committee Meeting Agenda
Wednesday, February 8, 2017 9:00 AM – 12:00 PM
MD DoIT Offices - 100 Community Place, Crownsville, MD 21032
(4th Floor Conference Room – Rm 4.102)
Parking: Open - Visitors need to sign-in with guard at front desk to obtain a visitor badge
In Attendance:
Patrick McLoughlin
Julie Spangler
Kevin Coyne
Al Wainger
Lynda Warthen
Erick Pate
Charlene Howard
Mara Kaminowitz
Sid Pandey
Dawn Blanchard
Julia Fischer
On the phone:
Jake Lloyd
James Shaw
Ardy Russakis
Peter Hanna
Alison Banks
Federal Government
Noemi Mendez
US Census
Local Government
Lynda Warthen
Frederick County
Private Industry
Dawn Blanchard
McCormick Taylor
Regional
Erick Pate
Calvert County
State Government
Kevin Coyne
MD Dept. of Natural
Resources (DNR)
SUBCOMMITTEE CHAIRS
Data and Resources
Jake Lloyd
Whitney Bailey Cox &
Magnani, LLC
Education
Julia Fischer
MD Dept of Information
Technology (DoIT)
Advocacy Chair
Sid Pandey
Dewberry
Open Meeting & Announcements – Patrick McLoughlin
 Approval of Prior Meeting Minutes
o Motion to approve--Patrick
o Second--Al
o Approved
 Open/General Discussion—Pat McLoughlin
1. Pat M—The last few quarterlies have had a tough time filling lighting talks; was offered to
the sponsors. Based on the lack of response, do we want to continue to offer this to the
sponsors and if we can’t fill them, do we change the format of the agenda? Or should we
put together a working group to evaluate other options for the timeslots?
a. Dawn—the question was raised during the caucus at the quarterly but there was
no feedback.
b. Al—handed out spreadsheet of current paid sponsors and those who have yet to
pay for 2017. There are currently only 6 commercial/private sponsors and that is if
everyone signs up.
c. Charlene—good to keep the opportunity but good to offer the slots to others.
Have we asked why the sponsors keep participating?
d. Pat M—Dawn sent out an email but there was no response. Maybe use one of
those spots for Emerging Professionals.
e. Dawn—suggestion to ask sponsors first, but then open it to the next tier until we
have enough people to fill the slots.
f. Al—sponsors are moving into the other categories because there isn’t added
value.
Outreach
Ashley Samonisky
Vision Planning and Consulting
Page 1 of 8
g.
Julie—given some of the recent activities with the Photogrammetrist committee,
these sessions could be used to educate the general membership on what’s going
on.
i. Pat M--the working groups could use the time to foster participation and
expose the topics to everyone. Maybe use the time for presentations by
the chair and possibly working sessions.
ii. Pat to James Shaw--Would MSS be available to update the membership
on happenings of the Photogrammetrist Committee and from the
perspective of an adjacent industry?
1. James—yes, this would be possible. The collaborative approach
is needed.
h. Pat M & Al to reach out to prior sponsors and determine who is planning to come
back vs who is not.
2. Al—what is the issue in PA with surveying?
a. Pat M—Data being collected and whether it was not verified by a surveyor.
b. James—A company provided location for utilities and the surveying board in PA
(same as engineering board in PA) decided to fine the company for unlicensed
practice of surveying. Company appealed, went to appellate court who
determined that use of GPS is not limited to surveyors. Judges did misinterpret
some information; judges final ruling was that surveying had to be tied to an
engineering project. The ruling does allow GIS surveys, but then also restricted the
survey practice in PA. This has spurred discussion in MD for MSS to review
definitions so that they are not overreaching and at the same time the
Photogrammetrist committee was established. The goal is to make the definitions
inclusive for all the needs of geospatial data.
MSGIC Treasury Report - Al Wainger
 Update
o Al—Balance is $30,458.26. We need to spend money.
o Pat M—Lynda and Pat M were discussing whether it is worth MSGIC purchasing an
ArcGIS Online organization map to support certain uses like membership map and
state of the counties, etc.
 Lynda—the current NCR project Frederick County is volunteering to host a
feature service to collaborate on boundaries/address points for the project.
Since this is going to be a statewide project it may make sense to host this
somewhere else.
 Julie—who would be responsible for maintaining this type of service? We
have no employees beyond interns.
 Kevin—is there a MSGIC account with the State’s AGO?
 Pat—No, it was a trial. From and AGO standpoint, do we have enough uses for
this?
 Erick—the cost for a nonprofit is minimal. There are uses for the account for
MSGIC business. Sid—would it be beneficial for training purposes?
 Pat—would have to look at the number of accounts we’d need.
 Mara—asked Lynda if she has spoken with Will Melville about sharing the
space with the emergency AGO organization as it may be a better fit.
Page 2 of 8

Charlene—the regional agencies may be candidates to host some of this type
of data. Lynda, Mara and Charlene will continue this portion of the
conversation offline regarding the NCR project.
**Two separate issues—one of an account to support MSGIC business and another of
supporting NG911 collaborative efforts
o
Pat M—can anyone get pricing for non profits? Sid volunteered. We will bring up at
next meeting for a vote.
Dawn—people want training.
 Lynda—people are disappointed that the training the day before TUgis is sold
out (SQL and Python).
 Ardys—hopeful MSGIC can offer those courses a second time. Ardys will
forward an email to Pat.
 Pat—definitely want to explore MSGIC offering those courses again this year.
 Charlene—those two courses are hands on skills based courses and people are
really interested in those types of classes.
 Allison—idea of simple marketing in geography depts to facilitate student
memberships.
 Ardys—heading to College Park tomorrow to talk about TUgis and include
marketing for MSGIC.
 Ardys, Pat and Julia are going to College Park at 3:30 tomorrow for an
outreach event for TUgis. The format has changed to a seminar
format rather than a meet & greet. The audience will be grads and
undergrads.
MSGIC Business
 Interns – Patrick McLoughlin
o Advertisement for next year by TUgis
 Pat—Lauren graduates in May 2017 so we are looking to fill her spot. Allison will
be onboard through the Fall 2017. This position should be advertised by TUgis.
Position advertisement has the resumes going to the MSGIC email. Submission
deadline will be adjusted to May 1 with intent to commit by June 1. We will need
to spin up a small working group again to review resumes and make a
recommendation.
 Julie—we need to ask Glen, Ashely, and Tari about the timelines they
used last time. Any volunteers? Sid will help out.
 Pat to follow up with Glen, Ashley and Tari to finalize the description and
get it posted.
 Virginia Legislature
o “Photogrammetrist” Committee Meeting Feedback - DLLR/PLSLB
 James—had limited involvement. Review definitions and look at intended use vs
how product is collected.
 Al—the challenge will be explaining the authoritative source for certain
uses.
 Email from Dr. Scott to membersparaphrased by Pat
Page 3 of 8


Pat—MSS and MSGIC need to be partnered going forward. James was not able to
attend the meeting last Thursday. Julia will be in later to explain more. Jim
Cannistra, Julia Fischer, and David Alvarez participated in the meeting Thursday.
This meeting focused on justifying the licensing on data being collected; does
there need to be a license for a GIS professional similar to a PE or PLS?
 Mara—care needs to be taken to handle data that starts as an
engineering product but ends up in a GIS database so as to not cause a
conflict.
 Al—it is only going to get more complicated with onset of autonomous
vehicles.
 James—UAS is also a factor because delivery drones may constantly
collect imagery and lidar data.
 James—the surveying community is not all aware of the more advanced collection
techniques. Advocating that even if surveyors aren’t collecting the data, they have
a role in validating its accuracy.
 Julia’s summary—DLLR has a formal committee where they are providing
recommendations on the updates to the statutes that govern licensed surveyors,
etc. Conversation was timely given happenings in VA. Side conversation about
whether or not GIS professionals needed to be licensed. Also discussed some
baseline definitions related to quality levels and what uses should require these
different levels. May change some regulations under the statutes to clarify current
practices. Next meeting will be in early April.
Congressional Bill (HR482 and S103) to prevent federal funds for development of racial disparity
geospatial data
o Charlene—This could have severe repercussions if it is allowed to be far reaching.
o David A forwarded an email update from NSGIC
o
From email:
Everyone, just wanted to share an update about these bills (S.103 and H.R.482) that
include language about geospatial databases. I heard the following from MAPPS
this evening:
We've been in touch with Lee's office. They don't expect the current bill to move in
the Senate Banking Committee. If it does move, they are very open to taking care of
the heartburn the geospatial community has communicated thus far. They don't
have an issue with geospatial data. They expressed an effort to embolden evidencebased data for which they consider geospatial to be central to this. All of this is
good news as we are positive that the Senator will amend his bill to reflect our
recent conversation with them should it be in a position to advance in the future.
o
Pat M—should we be taking a stance on this as an organization to indicate what
our position in?
 Lynda—and provide contacts if anyone wants to contact their leaders.
 Charlene—yes, present the issue to the membership and then determine
the stance.
 Mara—what is appropriate for us (MSGIC) to do?
 Pat M—at a minimum a blog post explaining the issue to the
Page 4 of 8
o
o

membership. Then potentially a letter to advocate for our position
on the topic.
 Lynda—does our website allow for a discussion on the topic?
 Mara—could we send out a survey monkey ahead of the post to hear from
the membership on their position?
 Charlene—this set a good stage for future issues.
 Pat M—start with the survey & blog, then possibly set up a conference call
if there is interest to discuss the topic.
 Mara—volunteering to write the blog post and post it by MSGIC. Mara will
wait for formal go ahead.
 Pat M—get a survey monkey out in the next day or so.
 Mara—do we know the schedule of the bill? The website indicates that the
bill was introduced 1/12/17.
 Pat M—asked Sid to look into the timeline and report back.
Lynda—example of “Drone Bill” last year; we need to be posting on these topics
and making membership more aware.
Al—For this bill and all subsequent bills; we need to look at our process for MSGIC
to react to issues. Do we first gather info and send it out to membership to vote, do
we formulate a position and then send it out? Then we need to make sure our
membership knows the process.
 Lynda—at a minimum provide the source information to the membership.
 Julie—do we know what other similar groups do? Like MSS or NSGIC?
 Pat M to James—how does MSS go about identifying upcoming
legislation that will impact their members and then how are
members alerted?
o James—MSS has a committee to review and formulate an
position. MSS also has a paid advocate that keeps an eye
out for legislation on behalf of MSS.
o Al—MAPPS has a summary they send out to members to
share the information.
o Mara—BMC has a similar process.
 Pat M—send out an email to ask for participation; will fall under
advocacy chair.
NG911/Public Safety Working Group – Peter Hanna
o Peter—The quarterly meeting had some action items to contact the PSAP directors and get
their GIS contacts. Still missing Garrett, Montgomery, Wicomico, Baltimore City, Talbot.
 Email sent to identify issues with borders and begin aggregating this information
 Numbers Board selected Mission Critical to oversee MD (same group as NCR is
using)
 Patrick C and Peter submitted a panel session for TUgis that has been accepted.
Working now to set up the panel.
 Email address set up through MSGIC for collaborating on this topic.
 Lynda—can share list of contacts with Peter that are participating from
Montgomery on the NCR.
 Pat M—is Peter aware of the status of the contract with the Numbers Board? Is
there an implementation plan?
Page 5 of 8






Peter—Numbers Board has a 12-18 month time table but specific goals
are not clear yet.
 Mara—is any of this going to be impacted by the bill that is with the
legislature?
o Mara recapping--there is a bill that has been introduced to the
state legislature that established an E911 statewide committee
and creates a funding mechanism. It lists a Fire Dept standard
and the NENA standard for addresses and permits the state to
pull funding from counties that do not enforce it. It appears to be
done in conjunction with the MACO 911 committee. The hearing
is in a week a two.
 Peter—the fear is that the current funding model from fees won’t be
sufficient to manage the NG911 system.
Maryland Elevation Working Group
o TUgis Working Session
 Julie will reach out to Roger for a write up for the website; include Patrick C and
Dr. Scott in the email.
 Pat M-next planned meeting is planned at TUgis for an hour-long breakout.
Ardys—would be beneficial to have a brief statement prepared to explain what the
meet up is to include in the program.
 Pat M—need outreach to go through social media AND email.
Business Entity Data Working Group – Jake Lloyd
o Pat asked Jake to email Doug Adams regarding an email campaign to the membership and
identify a time or call for a meeting to help facilitate this working group (lost Jake on the
call; Pat will follow up with an email.)
Membership Tracking – Kevin Coyne and Sid Pandey
o Sid—Tidy HQ It integrates with MailChimp, and Sid has spent some time setting it up. He
needs assistance to (1) tie it to our PayPal account and to (2) transition our current
membership through Salisbury to the new system?
 Kevin—need to migrate current members over. Is there any import process to load
via a spreadsheet? Sid to investigate.
 Sid—this migration only has to be done once.
 Al has concern over interface with PayPal. This is unclear. It is also unclear what
type of PayPal account MSGIC has right now. Dawn—there is a nonprofit PayPal
account. Pat M—we need to determine what type of account we have. Al—current
PayPal account has all historic transactions logged.
 Kevin—what is the issue with the current system?
 Pat M—it doesn’t meet the needs of the group as it has matured and
Salisbury is on the hook to assist with every small action/change.
 Al will look at the account to determine what type it is.
 Sid to follow up with Al and Dr. Scott to discuss a transition plan.
o Charlene has noticed a glitch with flag for ability to opt in or out of emails.
Exhibit Booth Panels
o Pat M—Sharon at CGIS is updating the panels. They will be ready for TUgis.
Conferences
Page 6 of 8
o


TUgis

Pat M—Conference hosted by Towson, MSGIC and DoIT. We will have a booth in
the nonprofit section. Booth will be a smaller footprint than past years. We will
need volunteers.
 Julie to handle--Use interns at the booth; set up, tear down, set up a schedule for
the day, MSGIC sponsor stands, ribbons for MSGIC members—who will have
these?
 Pat M to hand out new MSGIC pins to new board members.
 Julie needs to send out email soliciting volunteers for the booth.
 Pat M--MSGIC has 10 minutes in the plenary session; looking to talk more this year
about advocacy and working groups and how we support the membership…
 Resume panel discussion—Al volunteered. Patrick McL. Also volunteers from
education side (Mara suggested to tap Scott J for ideas based on his previous panel
held at CCBC)
 Patrick C will be MC for social.
 Outreach ahead of time via twitter/blog advertising MSGIC involvement in TUgis
focusing on working groups, etc.
o MML (Maryland Municipal League)
 Pat M—Do we want to sponsor or get a booth?
 Julie—is there a deadline for deciding?
 Pat M—we have time. Regroup and discuss once TUgis passes.
 Lynda—with NG911, exposure is good to gain.
o MACO Summer
 Pat M—we’ve had a presence at this in the past. Do we want to get a booth at this
year’s conference?
 Last year had a PowerPoint running.
 Had co-sponsored the winter MACO breakfast a few years ago; visibility wasn’t
worth it at this conference.
o Esri UC in San Diego
 Pat M checked--Padres play Sunday at 1 pm but on the road the west of the week
 If MSGIC wants to organize a meet-up we should begin this process
Quarterly Meeting Updates – Patrick Callahan
o Winter Meeting Review
 Pat M—filled space at Exelon JIC in Prince Frederick in January, may want to look
at another space at the library.
 Had our first web presentation with Esri Training Coordinator
 Feedback was that many people did not get alerts through email so they became
aware to late
o Spring Quarterly
 Patrick C working on finalizing location; looks like Hagerstown.
MD DoIT GIO Update
o Julia’s Update
 Pat M joined the DoIT team.
 Imagery program is moving forward. All PSAPS have received their imagery. Matt
working to add to iMap.
 Lidar has been migrated to DoIT servers from Salisbury.
 Lidar download application is close to being released.
Page 7 of 8



Esri licensing reconciliation occurring to switch from ELA to non-ELA.
Data Catalog will be migrated to 2.0 version of Esri Data Catalog; in testing now.
SaaS MC release has been delayed; maybe this week, maybe next week.

Education
o LiDAR Workshop
 Julia—there has been nothing set up yet. She will talk to Mike and Logan to set up
another workshop, maybe two in 2017.
o Other Educational Outreach Efforts
 Julia—Art Lembo is going to offer open source training at TUgis and he will make
this available through MSGIC. He and Julia are exploring a series format for his
topics. Doug A has been offering GISP application seminar, but URISA has
developed a seminar that teaches for the test. She is in contact with URISA to
secure licensing for this. We as a group will have to decide if we want to invest in
this training as there will be additional costs.
 Pat M—Ardys brought up that Monday sessions are filled; Ardys will reply that
MSGIC will hold these sessions again at a later date.
 Marketing/Outreach/Advocacy
o Update from Ashley via email
 MSS Outreach Opportunity at Mervo this Friday with students; Pat M will be
attending
 Website Update
 MSGIC website went down two weeks ago; that is back up and running
 Working group is meeting to review options
 Looking to add more web maps
 Interns to attend TUgis—can MSGIC cover the registration cost? Pat M—are both
available to attend the conference? There are two registrations available with our
booth.
 Ashley asked for exact colors for the booth so she can use them on the website.
 Ashley requested images that could be used on the website.
 Emerging Professionals – Sid Pandey
o Pat M--an email was sent from Dawn based on feedback at the winter quarterly that
suggested having a problem solving session to engage new and emerging professionals.
Ardys ok’d the space/time at the conference and now the idea needs to be further
developed.
o Sid—working on the spotlight forms and need to discuss the rollout of the form. Pat M—
maybe aim to send out by TUgis.
o Sid—is there a student lightning talk session at TUgis? Pat M—we will have to look at the
agenda for TUgis.
 New Business
o Julie asked for someone to fill in next meeting as she is not available to attend.
Conference call info:
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/505747773
You can also dial in using your phone.
United States: (646) 749-3131
Access Code: 505-747-773
Page 8 of 8